Re: Alternatives to containers/collections (was Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0")

Danny Ayers wrote:
> I don't disagree, though the theory seems neater than containers, in
> practice they do seem really clunky. Any thoughts on what might be a
> better paradigm? Anything perhaps lightly layered on top of the
> container style?
>   

How about s p o?
e.g. for a container with 3 things

s p o1
s p o2
s p o3

i.e. the extra layer for the container is unnecessary and can just be 
omitted.

I think the attractiveness of RDF is minimalism and quietly deprecating 
containers without any explicit replacement is quite doable.

Jeremy